Re: Ending the War on Science?

On Mar 13, 4:32 pm, "[M]adman" <g...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
unrestrained_h...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On Mar 12, 1:19 am, "[M]adman" <g...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
heekster wrote:
On Wed, 11 Mar 2009 18:47:42 -0500, "[M]adman" <g...@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

VoiceOfReason wrote:
President Obama made good on a campaign promise today by
announcing a plan to raise the level of scientific integrity in
policymaking - but the guy who is supposed to flesh out the plan
is still stuck in Senate confirmation limbo.

Word about Obama's presidential memorandum on scientific integrity
came as the president signed a separate executive order loosening
the White House's limits on stem cell research.

"Promoting science isn't just about providing resources - it is
also about protecting free and open inquiry," Obama said during
today's signing ceremony. "It is about letting scientists like
those here today do their jobs, free from manipulation or
coercion, and listening to what they tell us, even when it's
inconvenient - especially when it's inconvenient. It is about
ensuring that scientific data is never distorted or concealed to
serve a political agenda - and that we make scientific decisions
based on facts, not ideology."

Alan Leshner, chief executive officer of the American Association
for the Advancement of Science, told The Associated Press that the
turnout for the ceremony included "more happy scientists than I've
seen" at the White House during his 30 years in Washington.

Doug Melton, who is the co-director of the Harvard Stem Cell
Institute as well as the father of two children with Type I
diabetes that could possibly be treated with stem cells, said he
welcomed today's developments as "an enormous relief and a time
for celebration."

"Science thrives when there is an open and collaborative exchange,
not when there are artificial barriers, silos, constructed by the
government," Melton said in a statement.

Obama's predecessor, George W. Bush, came under criticism
throughout his White House tenure for letting political leanings
dictate federal policy on issues ranging from embryonic stem
cells to environmental policies. There's a long list of horror
stories, including the tales told about climate researcher Rick
Piltz and wildlife biologist Andy Eller, as well as accounts from
researchers at the U.S. Geological Survey and at NASA and the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Today's memo calls on the director of the White House's Office of
Science and Technology Policy to draw up a detailed plan over the
next 120 days to make sure officials who deal with science and
technology policy are selected because of their expertise rather
than their politics. The plan also would seek to ensure that all
the findings on which policy decisions are based will be made
public, and that appropriate protections will be extended to
"science whistleblowers" who question the basis for those
decisions.

The memo makes good on a promise included in Obama's responses to
a Science Debate 2008 questionnaire. Chris Mooney, author of "The
Republican War on Science," said the memo breaks new ground by
putting the White House's top science adviser in charge of
guaranteeing scientific integrity at every federal agency. "It
sounds like the people in the Cabinet will need to talk to him
like an equal," Mooney said.

During the previous administration, White House science adviser
John Marburger often seemed to be cast as an apologist for Bush's
science policies rather than a watchdog, Mooney said. "Either
Marburger or the agency would say, 'No, we didn't do anything
wrong. This is standard agency procedure,'" he said.

"It's a different situation now. ... There are going to be rules,
things you can't do - and at least nominally, that's more than the
Bush administration did," Mooney added.

The only problem is that Obama's nominee for science adviser,
Harvard physicist and climate expert John Holdren, hasn't yet been
confirmed by the Senate. Neither has marine researcher Jane
Lubchenco, Obama's choice to head NOAA.

The reasons for the delay are murky: Any senator can put a hold
on a confirmation vote, and for a time it looked as if the
culprit was Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J. But late last week,
Menendez's office told Talking Points Memo that the senator was
no longer standing in the way. So who is?

Lubchenco has faced some criticism from Eastern fishing interests,
but it's Holdren who has generated the most controversy. Some
worry that Holdren holds extreme views on the global climate
crisis, and that science policies might be slanted to fit those
views. That's made him a lightning rod for commentators sounding
the alarm about a "Democrat War on Science."

Mooney addressed those worries in a Science Progress blog posting
in December and is keeping an eye on the controversy. In Mooney's
view, the opposition is a political reaction to the years of
criticism that Bush faced on the integrity issue. "What could be
more obvious than to try to do a 180 and flip it, and say, 'No,
it's Obama who's trying to get political'?" Mooney said.

For whatever reason, Holdren's appointment remains on hold - and
thus Obama's plan for improving scientific integrity may have to
be put on hold as well.

You'll find a variety of perspectives on Obama's policies from the
National Academies, from TierneyLab at The New York Times, from
Commonweal and the Union of Concerned Scientists.

Obama is defending */real/* science.

Not evolution.

Wrong answer.

Where in the above article is there information saying he defending
evolution?

In one form or another, conflicts over the teaching of evolution in
public schools have been an important aspect of the Christian
Right's culture wars against modernity and the Enlightenment.
Almost every Republican candidate for president has rejected
evolutionary science; support for creationism has almost been a
litmus test for Republican politicians. Barack Obama does accept
evolutionary science and, moreover, he opposes teaching any form of
creationism - including Intelligent Design creationism - alongside
evolution in public schools.
http://atheism.about.com/od/barackobamareligionfaith/tp/BarackObamaRe....

Damn, you're ignorant.

You seem to think that /ALL/ information on the Internet is somehow
magically accurate.

Free Clue:
For every web page that says the sky is blue you can find one that
says it is not.

I have not witnessed so much collective stupidity in one place as I
see here. This despite the fact that many of you claim to be /so
edcuated/.

However, in this paticular case you are somewhat correct. I say
"somewhat" because your article at about.com places a paticular
'spin' on his position which you happen to favor because it goes
*with* the grain of your individual views.

================================
To quote Obama himself to the following question:

Q: York County was recently in the news for a lawsuit involving the
teaching of intelligent design. What's your attitude regarding the
teaching of evolution in public schools?

A: "I'm a Christian, and I believe in parents being able to provide
children with religious instruction without interference from the
state. But I also believe our schools are there to teach worldly
knowledge and science. I believe in evolution, and I believe there's
a difference between science and faith. That doesn't make faith any
less important than science. It just means they're two different
things. And I think it's a mistake to try to cloud the teaching of
science with theories that frankly don't hold up to scientific
inquiry." ================================

I happen to agree with him. Why muddy the waters of Faith and
Religion with man-made theories that change with each new discovery?

Indeed. Why subject the content of doctrine to actual facts (aka "new
discoveries")?

You do not know for sure if your "new discoveries" are  actual facts. Do
you?

Or are you claiming to have absolute truth?

Let us stop right here for the moment.

Well? Do you have actual facts?



Shut up, Madman. The adults are talking here.



================================================
Lenny Flank
"There are no loose threads in the web of life"

Editor, Red and Black Publishers
http://www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

.

Relevant Pages

  • A Science Historian takes on climate-change skeptics and fights off their attacks
    ... A Science Historian takes on climate-change skeptics and fights off their ... inherent uncertainty of science research as a way to delay policy action. ... Oreskes has discovered that a group of three Cold War-era physicists?S. ... whereas scientists with appropriate expertise make ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: Ending the War on Science?
    ... Word about Obama's presidential memorandum on scientific integrity ... "Promoting science isn?t just about providing resources - it is also ... "It is about letting scientists like those here ... Science and Technology Policy to draw up a detailed plan over the next ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Ending the War on Science?
    ... Word about Obama's presidential memorandum on scientific integrity ... "Promoting science isn�t just about providing resources - it is also ... "It is about letting scientists like those here ... Science and Technology Policy to draw up a detailed plan over the next ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Ending the War on Science?
    ... a plan to raise the level of scientific integrity in policymaking - ... "It is about letting scientists like those here ... Science and Technology Policy to draw up a detailed plan over the ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Ending the War on Science?
    ... a plan to raise the level of scientific integrity in policymaking - ... "It is about letting scientists like those here ... Science and Technology Policy to draw up a detailed plan over the ...
    (talk.origins)